According to a SFO Chief Pilot at Family Day the A321neo is going to be the replacement for the 752 fleet. Said pilot also claims that the range on the 321neo is sufficient to replace the 752s, despite the published numbers indicating otherwise.

I suspect the A321 could be a good replacement for the PMUA fleet as UA uses them for domestic service. The PMCO 752s being newer and used for trans atlantic service I'd suspect will be around for awhile.

The family does hopefully looks like this in the future incl. A319Neo, A320Neo and A321Neo! Let's also suggest that the next generation is not only ecological oriented but also passenger oriented with better storage space in overhead bins, clever seat design, larger windows and better individual lighting // Aircon systems too. And of course the new aircraft family should help to bring cost down for airlines and the airlines should help bring costs down for passengers too. But, a big but, let's governments reduce taxes for flyers as well, now there is dreaming!

The last numbers I saw from Airbus showed a range of "up to 3,450nm" for the 3210neo, so most TATL routes are really going to be pushing the limits. If Airbus had a lot more confidence in the range being significantly higher, I image they would publicize that to try and pick up business from the many carriers that will be looking for TATL 752 replacements in the future.

Could UA be looking at the 321neo as a domestic 752 replacement? Sure. But, I won't believe it from a pilot until he/she can back it up with a company press release announcing a firm order.

IMHO, Airbus is able to offer better financing terms on their air-frames than Boeing is. The WTO will be the final judge of that mess.

I am no expert, but everything I have heard is that Airbus products require more maintenance and have substantially less in service life expectancies than their Boeing competition. I invite someone to dispute or confirm this with actual facts.

So, again, in my non-expert opinion, when you buy a Boeing product you are probably paying a bit more, but are getting a more bullet proof airframe that will cost you less in the long term.

I am no expert, but everything I have heard is that Airbus products require more maintenance and have substantially less in service life expectancies than their Boeing competition. I invite someone to dispute or confirm this with actual facts.

Click to expand...

LOL. I have heard <random statement> about <topic I am not an expert about>. I invite someone to dispute or confirm this with actual facts.

Can someone enlighten me as to why boeing stopped producing 757's? Almost every airline is talking about replacing their 757 fleet, but it seems like there just isn't a suitable replacement, in terms of an aircraft of similar size that can perform the same missions. All the airlines seem to be scrambling to find some sort of alternative, so why didn't Boeing develop a "next generation" 757 as they did with the 737 or 777 family, for instance?

Can someone enlighten me as to why boeing stopped producing 757's? Almost every airline is talking about replacing their 757 fleet, but it seems like there just isn't a suitable replacement, in terms of an aircraft of similar size that can perform the same missions. All the airlines seem to be scrambling to find some sort of alternative, so why didn't Boeing develop a "next generation" 757 as they did with the 737 or 777 family, for instance?

Click to expand...

No one was ordering the 757s near the end of production. CO converted their last 753 order to 738s.

Can someone enlighten me as to why boeing stopped producing 757's? Almost every airline is talking about replacing their 757 fleet, but it seems like there just isn't a suitable replacement, in terms of an aircraft of similar size that can perform the same missions. All the airlines seem to be scrambling to find some sort of alternative, so why didn't Boeing develop a "next generation" 757 as they did with the 737 or 777 family, for instance?

Click to expand...

I am speculating here, but maybe the potential market is just too small to justify the capital investment and use of presumably limited engineering/management resources? Many of the missions can be flown with other aircraft (such as the 737-900 or the 321). How many 757MAX (or whatever they'd call it) could they sell?

The 737-800/900ER basically removed any remaining market for the 757 EXCEPT for TATL where they do not have the range. As noted the market for this mission is limited and thus the one area where the 321neo and 737-Max will be left to duke it out on who can come up with a suitable replacement for the 757 TATL missions.

Can someone enlighten me as to why boeing stopped producing 757's? Almost every airline is talking about replacing their 757 fleet, but it seems like there just isn't a suitable replacement, in terms of an aircraft of similar size that can perform the same missions. All the airlines seem to be scrambling to find some sort of alternative, so why didn't Boeing develop a "next generation" 757 as they did with the 737 or 777 family, for instance?

Click to expand...

Boeing built 1,050 appx 757s and has built 6,800 appx 737s. It is no surprise that boeing is sinking more resources into the 737.

One thing that hurt the sales of the 757 was the reclassification by the FAA as a Heavy (now classified as Large) because of the wind vortex that it created and their effect on small aircraft.This meant greater seperation at departure between aircraft at a time when the lines were long for take-off creating an operational issue for the airlines and airports especially as RJ's were starting to get popular at the time

I can see the range issue being of great importance (although if it stopped UACO flying TATL single aisles, I wouldn't be too unhappy), but I cannot understand the concerns as to comfort in an A321 vs a 757. They are both very long single aisle airplanes. The A321 is only 9 feet shorter than the 757 so there's really very little difference from the perception when inside. It is, of course, more modern also.

The real question from our point of view then is how UA chooses to fit and maintain the interiors. We can only hope, or should it be pray....

I can see the range issue being of great importance (although if it stopped UACO flying TATL single aisles, I wouldn't be too unhappy), but I cannot understand the concerns as to comfort in an A321 vs a 757. They are both very long single aisle airplanes. The A321 is only 9 feet shorter than the 757 so there's really very little difference from the perception when inside. It is, of course, more modern also.

The real question from our point of view then is how UA chooses to fit and maintain the interiors. We can only hope, or should it be pray....

Click to expand...

I know this is silly and irrational, but I feel safer on a Boeing product than an Airbus. I just think back to that Aloha incident where half of the skin of the aircraft was torn away and the freaking thing kept flying.

I know this is silly and irrational, but I feel safer on a Boeing product than an Airbus. I just think back to that Aloha incident where half of the skin of the aircraft was torn away and the freaking thing kept flying.

Click to expand...

It's not entirely irrational, actually - while both quite safe, and I have no objections to flying aircraft produced by either one, Boeing and Airbus use very different philosophies when it comes to the cockpit. Boeing aircraft still require pilots to be pilots while Airbus aircraft have led to a phenomenon I like to refer to as "aircraft control operators". In coming years, many airlines are going to be forced to commit additional resources to reinforce the basics of piloting or else face the increasing likelihood of more bizarre accidents like AF447.

The A321neo should be a great replacement for the domestic 752s used out of DEN for their takeoff performance.

2L on the 321 is a little too close to the engine to board through 2L - but i really hope they fix this for the neo. 2L boarding on a narrowbody really speeds things up and is a much nicer experience in F.

“Our intention was never to launch a website, our intention was to build a global brand for frequent flyers.”

content + community + technology + social

InsideFlyer was created by travelers, for travelers. Here you can discover and share your experiences related to travel and frequent flyer programs with leisure travelers, infrequent flyers and road warriors alike.

InsideFlyer is a privately funded venture based in Colorado Springs, CO (affectionally—the House of Miles). We’re a small diverse group of experienced frequent flyer experts, travel community builders, technologists, and friends of the flyer who want to help you learn to be an expert traveler. We believe that learning about frequent flyer miles should be as fun as travel itself.

Milepoint is now InsideFlyer. “Our intention was never to launch a website, our intention was to build a global brand for frequent flyers.” We’ve got news to share with you. Today we are announcing… Continue Reading